Rick Barnes discussion (merged)

[xavierbballfan]

I’m sure it’s been pointed out already but…. The NCAA tournament is generally a really bad way to determine the best team in basketball? There is so much randomness in a one game winner take all style tournament. Which is very fun and hopefully stays the same forever. But is also really bad at being meaningful.

 

[kiddiedoc]

I’m sure it’s been pointed out already but…. The NCAA tournament is generally a really bad way to determine the best team in basketball? There is so much randomness in a one game winner take all style tournament. Which is very fun and hopefully stays the same forever. But is also really bad at being meaningful.

It is true that one off-night is all it takes to get bounced. Those happen in basketball. I think Barnes has been the recipient of bad luck in the NCAAT more than anything. Hopefully our defense can keep us around when one of those games comes around.

 

[jtipto10]

Personally I think a best of 3 series starting at the sweet 16 would be awesome to watch, but I understand it takes away some of the cinderella magic people love to see during the tournament. You'd also have to extend the tournament in all likelihood to accommodate that.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Personally I think a best of 3 series starting at the sweet 16 would be awesome to watch, but I understand it takes away some of the cinderella magic people love to see during the tournament. You'd also have to extend the tournament in all likelihood to accommodate that.

It would also be tiresome to watch the same matchup 3x. The finals could possibly become a best of 3, but that would dilute the huge appeal of the national championship game on that Monday night.

I think that the biggest threat to the NCAAT is players could opt out to preserve themselves from injury before inking their massive NBA contract. It’s already ruining bowl games.

 

[jtipto10]

It would also be tiresome to watch the same matchup 3x. The finals could possibly become a best of 3, but that would dilute the huge appeal of the national championship game on that Monday night.

I think that the biggest threat to the NCAAT is players could opt out to preserve themselves from injury before inking their massive NBA contract. It’s already ruining bowl games.

Idk, the NBA does it for 5 and 7 game series with teams that have all already played each other that season (although I admit the early rounds do get a bit stale). But the east and west finals tend to be really good and you develop storylines over the course of each individual series which is neat. I think it'd be pretty cool for us to play a 3 game series against Villanova or Gonzaga or UCLA or Ohio State for example though. Or even a team like St. Peters.

 

[mr.checkerboards]

I really don't get the hate for the tournament. Do good teams get knocked out at times sure, but for the most part the team who wins it is deserving. Besides maybe the 2 Uconn teams who won it all, I dont really see any recent champions I would argue with, and those teams were solid with NBA talent.
The tournament is about consistency can you string together several good games in a row.

 

[jtipto10]

I really don't get the hate for the tournament. Do good teams get knocked out at times sure, but for the most part the team who wins it is deserving. Besides maybe the 2 Uconn teams who won it all, I dont really see any recent champions I would argue with, and those teams were solid with NBA talent.
The tournament is about consistency can you string together several good games in a row.

Oh I don't hate the tournament at all. This is just a mid-season thought experiment to pass time at work for me.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

I really don't get the hate for the tournament. Do good teams get knocked out at times sure, but for the most part the team who wins it is deserving. Besides maybe the 2 Uconn teams who won it all, I dont really see any recent champions I would argue with, and those teams were solid with NBA talent.
The tournament is about consistency can you string together several good games in a row.

Right, it’s more about that than being the best team…look at UNC just last year and to start this year, nobody thinks that was the best team, they just got hot at the right time. I’m not saying I dislike the tourney or have a great idea on improving it because I don’t, I think you can say you love the tourney but also admit that more often than not the best team doesn’t win it.

 

[mr.checkerboards]

Right, it’s more about that than being the best team…look at UNC just last year and to start this year, nobody thinks that was the best team, they just got hot at the right time. I’m not saying I dislike the tourney or have a great idea on improving it because I don’t, I think you can say you love the tourney but also admit that more often than not the best team doesn’t win it.

I will say at times the team the media says is the best doesn't win it. Gonzaga against Baylor( I won't go into my Zaga is overrated spiel, or the UK team that got beaten by Wisconsin, but my main point is it's not like random 12 seeds are coming out of nowhere winning the tournament.

 

[mr.checkerboards]

Oh I don't hate the tournament at all. This is just a mid-season thought experiment to pass time at work for me.

Fair enough.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

I will say at times the team the media says is the best doesn't win it. Gonzaga against Baylor( I won't go into my Zaga is overrated spiel, or the UK team that got beaten by Wisconsin, but my main point is it's not like random 12 seeds are coming out of nowhere winning the tournament.

Just posted it in another thread, but baseball type format could be interesting.

 

[mr.checkerboards]

Just posted it in another thread, but baseball type format could be interesting.

I dont really get why this got moved in here.
It would but you would also lose some of the magic with March by doing that.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

I dont really get why this got moved in here.
It would but you would also lose some of the magic with March by doing that.

For sure, but that seemed to be the complaint by most is the fact best teams often times get knocked out early…it’s both the best and worst part.

 

[mr.checkerboards]

For sure, but that seemed to be the complaint by most is the fact best teams often times get knocked out early…it’s both the best and worst part.

It's the complaint by most sure, but my argument always is were they really the best if they get knocked out?
I went back and looked at the UNC team from last year, they were pre season #12 had a couple 5* and overall just a solid roster, I know they weren't good in the reg season but honestly based on pre season expectations last years run was kinda what people expected of them.

 

[ThatVolGuy]

There are obviously lots of upsets in the first few rounds, but I looked at some historical KenPom data recently (I believe I posted about it here a few weeks back), and over the past 20 years, the NCAA champion had an average KenPom ranking of something like 2.5 or 3. I'd be more inclined to change the format if the cream didn't usually rise to the top, but that hasn't really been the case.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

It's the complaint by most sure, but my argument always is were they really the best if they get knocked out?
I went back and looked at the UNC team from last year, they were pre season #12 had a couple 5* and overall just a solid roster, I know they weren't good in the reg season but honestly based on pre season expectations last years run was kinda what people expected of them.

Preseason polls don’t mean anything, they were #1 this year, are people expecting them to repeat?

 

[mr.checkerboards]

Preseason polls don’t mean anything, they were #1 this year, are people expecting them to repeat?

I think most did considering they brought pretty much everyone back.

 

[xavierbballfan]

There are obviously lots of upsets in the first few rounds, but I looked at some historical KenPom data recently (I believe I posted about it here a few weeks back), and over the past 20 years, the NCAA champion had an average KenPom ranking of something like 2.5 or 3. I'd be more inclined to change the format if the cream didn't usually rise to the top, but that hasn't really been the case.

That’s interesting. I wouldn’t have thought that it was that high. Maybe still higher on average with a series format? But I wouldn’t vote to change the tournament. Just too exciting.

I do feel like it’s a bit unfair to place a ton of emphasis for a coach’s legacy on how their teams performed in March. As an example for Tennessee specifically, the team that won the outright regular season SEC title in 17-18 (lost second round with Bone, Williams, Admiral) was probably better than the team in 2010 that made an elite 8 run. Maybe fans would prefer the elite 8 run alone? I guess I personally enjoy watching the whole season and a better performance throughout.

My best example of the tournament being a poor judge, though, is UVA being a deserving 1 seed and losing in the first round several years back. The next year, they won the tournament. It creates awesome storylines. I just think it tends to carry too much weight in judging teams/coaches looking back. Was the prior UVA team really best described as no better than 33rd best? A disappointing team? Most of the same players were there the next year and good enough to win the championship. That took some luck, and without that run, I think the entire story about that prior team and coach would focus on the 16 seed 1 seed upset.

I personally think Barnes should be remembered as a great coach (For both his work at Texas and Tennessee) regardless of his final record in March.

I also think there’s a good chance that record looks a lot better after this season…hopefully.

 

[cardvolfan]

That’s interesting. I wouldn’t have thought that it was that high. Maybe still higher on average with a series format? But I wouldn’t vote to change the tournament. Just too exciting.

I do feel like it’s a bit unfair to place a ton of emphasis for a coach’s legacy on how their teams performed in March. As an example for Tennessee specifically, the team that won the outright regular season SEC title in 17-18 (lost second round with Bone, Williams, Admiral) was probably better than the team in 2010 that made an elite 8 run. Maybe fans would prefer the elite 8 run alone? I guess I personally enjoy watching the whole season and a better performance throughout.

My best example of the tournament being a poor judge, though, is UVA being a deserving 1 seed and losing in the first round several years back. The next year, they won the tournament. It creates awesome storylines. I just think it tends to carry too much weight in judging teams/coaches looking back. Was the prior UVA team really best described as no better than 33rd best? A disappointing team? Most of the same players were there the next year and good enough to win the championship. That took some luck, and without that run, I think the entire story about that prior team and coach would focus on the 16 seed 1 seed upset.

I personally think Barnes should be remembered as a great coach (For both his work at Texas and Tennessee) regardless of his final record in March.

I also think there’s a good chance that record looks a lot better after this season…hopefully.

You eloquently explained our ongoing debate. Thanks for your post. People can not, and will not, relent on the Barnes has failed us theory.

 

[Vols till I fall]

So being ranked number 2 in the country is getting old?

 

[jaguinn5]

Well, the analogy is that it’s kind of random that Hugh has a Final Four on his resume.

The list of coaches that have one final four appearance is a long list, and it isn't exactly prestigious from top to bottom. The fact that Barnes is in that group isn't exactly flattering. There are 9 other ACTIVE head coaches with more final four appearances and 11 more ACTIVE head coaches with one final four appearance. Barnes is in no way among elite company when it comes to post season success. For all the good things that Barnes brings to the table, tournament success has never been one of them. Using Hugh Durham isn't making any kind of point other than that Barnes' one final four appearance isn't exactly impressive when you look at his expectations and the other coaches who have done it.

 

[bleedingTNorange]

The list of coaches that have one final four appearance is a long list, and it isn't exactly prestigious from top to bottom. The fact that Barnes is in that group isn't exactly flattering. There are 9 other ACTIVE head coaches with more final four appearances and 11 more ACTIVE head coaches with one final four appearance. Barnes is in no way among elite company when it comes to post season success. For all the good things that Barnes brings to the table, tournament success has never been one of them. Using Hugh Durham isn't making any kind of point other than that Barnes' one final four appearance isn't exactly impressive when you look at his expectations and the other coaches who have done it.

Honest question because idk the answer, but you seem to have the info…

How many current head coaches have 4+ S16’s, 2+E8’s and 1+F4?

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

The list of coaches that have one final four appearance is a long list, and it isn't exactly prestigious from top to bottom. The fact that Barnes is in that group isn't exactly flattering. There are 9 other ACTIVE head coaches with more final four appearances and 11 more ACTIVE head coaches with one final four appearance. Barnes is in no way among elite company when it comes to post season success. For all the good things that Barnes brings to the table, tournament success has never been one of them. Using Hugh Durham isn't making any kind of point other than that Barnes' one final four appearance isn't exactly impressive when you look at his expectations and the other coaches who have done it.

Barnes has won two recent tournaments.

My pointing out that Hugh Durham has a Final Four was supporting the argument that it’s very random. Any good team can get hot, have a favorable draw, no injuries, face opponents with key injuries, get lucky bounces, and have favorable whistles and win 4 consecutive games.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Honest question because idk the answer, but you seem to have the info…

How many current head coaches have 4+ S16’s, 2+E8’s and 1+F4?

And conference regular season championships in 2 major conferences (loaded with blue blood programs) and tournament championships in 2 as well.

 

[DuckInAPen]

The list of coaches that have one final four appearance is a long list, and it isn't exactly prestigious from top to bottom. The fact that Barnes is in that group isn't exactly flattering. There are 9 other ACTIVE head coaches with more final four appearances and 11 more ACTIVE head coaches with one final four appearance. Barnes is in no way among elite company when it comes to post season success. For all the good things that Barnes brings to the table, tournament success has never been one of them. Using Hugh Durham isn't making any kind of point other than that Barnes' one final four appearance isn't exactly impressive when you look at his expectations and the other coaches who have done it.

So of 358 active D1 coaches, only 2.5% have advanced in the tourney farther than Barnes and only 5.6% have advanced as far as or farther than Barnes? That "isn't exactly impressive"?